Question about reamping

Trailer

Has anyone ever had any luck with this? I have a guitar part and a bass part that I recorded in my home through a DI box into my 002. Thus, it doesn't have the tone you get going through a good amp and microphone. I've rerecorded these parts mutiple times in the studio, but it's always missing the magic that the home recording has.

If I reamp these original recordings will it be obvious to the listener that the sounds are reamped? Will it just sound like a better mixed version of the direct input... or will it sound like I was playing those parts through an amp all along?

ianvomsaal

I've never done it myself, but I know that David Gilmour did it with his 2nd
solo for "Comfortably Numb" - he used a '55 Les Paul Goldtop with P90's for
that (and this solo is a regular candidate for "Best Guitar Solo Of All Time).
Didn't seem to hurt that solo, so it can't hurt to try it and see if you like it.
Cheers . . .

- Ian

Trailer

Great fucking answer Ian!!
Now I'm stoked on trying this...
Gilmour's solo on Comfortably Numb!?!:eek: Holy shit:cool:

mccreadyisgod

Electronically, re-amping should sound exactly the same as if you'd played thru the amp and microphone in the first place, so long as you use a proper reamping converter box (it's essentially a DI box wired in reverse). That makes it a great tool for studio use, especially if you want to edit a performance a great deal.

To bring anybody else up to speed...

Reamping involves recording something like a guitar or bass directly into the recorder via a Direct Injection (DI) box. A DI converts the signal from a high-impedance instrument-level signal into a low-impedance microphone-level signal. You can then send that recorded signal back out of the recorder, thru a reamping box (like I said, essentially a DI wired in reverse) which converts the signal from a low-impedance, line-level signal to a high-impedance, instrument-level signal; and then you can plug into whatever you want to, be it stompboxes, a POD, multi-FX, studio FX, and/or ultimately into an amp. The ultimate benefit is that you can concentrate on the performance first, and then get the perfect tone later. You can play with different stompboxes, different settings, different amps, different cabinets, different mics, different preamps, different studio effects... see the advantages?

keeponrockin

mccreadyisgod wrote:

Electronically, re-amping should sound exactly the same as if you'd played thru the amp and microphone in the first place, so long as you use a proper reamping converter box (it's essentially a DI box wired in reverse). That makes it a great tool for studio use, especially if you want to edit a performance a great deal.

To bring anybody else up to speed...

Reamping involves recording something like a guitar or bass directly into the recorder via a Direct Injection (DI) box. A DI converts the signal from a high-impedance instrument-level signal into a low-impedance microphone-level signal. You can then send that recorded signal back out of the recorder, thru a reamping box (like I said, essentially a DI wired in reverse) which converts the signal from a low-impedance, line-level signal to a high-impedance, instrument-level signal; and then you can plug into whatever you want to, be it stompboxes, a POD, multi-FX, studio FX, and/or ultimately into an amp. The ultimate benefit is that you can concentrate on the performance first, and then get the perfect tone later. You can play with different stompboxes, different settings, different amps, different cabinets, different mics, different preamps, different studio effects... see the advantages?

Thanks MIG, I was TOTALLY lost for a minute!